'nah, school don't need more funding. we can fix that issue by charging teachers for the paper to run their tests on. we'll make it easy and just put it in the vending machine.'
There’s vending machines on campus that sell pens, pencils, erasers, and other assorted school goodies.
Heck if there’s a line to buy scantrons, you have to walk to the book store to buy them. :/
That was one thing that goddamn infuriated me about college. I was spending thousands of dollars per semester on classes and housing, like another thousand for various fees, like another thousand for books, and then I had to pay to take the goddamn tests? Scantrons and Blue Books aren’t expensive but it’s the principle of the thing.
Hold up. I’ve been out of school for quite some time, but charging students for test-taking materials is a thing now? Shit.
Education, healthcare, internet access: we spend more money on these things than almost anyone else in the world, but oftentimes with worse results.
New research by Pam Mueller and Daniel Oppenheimer demonstrates that students who write out their notes on paper actually learn more. Across three experiments, Mueller and Oppenheimer had students take notes in a classroom setting and then tested students on their memory for factual detail, their conceptual understanding of the material, and their ability to synthesize and generalize the information. Half of the students were instructed to take notes with a laptop, and the other half were instructed to write the notes out by hand. As in other studies, students who used laptops took more notes. In each study, however, those who wrote out their notes by hand had a stronger conceptual understanding and were more successful in applying and integrating the material than those who used took notes with their laptops.
What drives this paradoxical finding? Mueller and Oppenheimer postulate that taking notes by hand requires different types of cognitive processing than taking notes on a laptop, and these different processes have consequences for learning. Writing by hand is slower and more cumbersome than typing, and students cannot possibly write down every word in a lecture. Instead, they listen, digest, and summarize so that they can succinctly capture the essence of the information. Thus, taking notes by hand forces the brain to engage in some heavy “mental lifting,” and these efforts foster comprehension and retention. By contrast, when typing students can easily produce a written record of the lecture without processing its meaning, as faster typing speeds allow students to transcribe a lecture word for word without devoting much thought to the content.
I’ve found this to be true for me, at least. With a laptop, I end up basically transcribing what a lecturer (or whoever) is saying.
Other advantages to a pen and paper: I don’t have to worry about dropping my paper notebook and breaking it; I don’t have to sit near an electrical outlet; they’re cheap.
Jindal and his allies want the public to see them as entirely sincere. They’re not trying to crush teachers’ unions, and they’re not on a privatization crusade, intent on destroying public institutions. They just want to help low-income children, even spending public funds to advance their goal.
But their purported concern for the poor is literally unbelievable. When the issue is health care and housing, Jindal and other conservatives say struggling families should rely on the free market and their capacity to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. When the issue is education, suddenly the right cares deeply about disadvantaged children and is eager to “help.”
When Jindal and other school voucher advocates are ready to assist “poor and disadvantaged” families in ways that don’t undermine public schools and teachers’ unions, I’ll gladly revisit the debate. Until then, this looks a lot like a scam.
People are going into debt for the majority of their lives in order to get the college degree that’s necessary for many jobs, yet that BA has become less and less valuable over time. Why should people invest so much in their training if it’s not going to pay off?
Finn, Geraldine. Voices of Women, Voices of Feminism: Limited Edition. Fernwood Publishing; Halifax. 1993. (pg. 113)
Relevant: a recent study that found women face persistent gender bias in the sciences:
Science professors at American universities widely regard female undergraduates as less competent than male students with the same accomplishments and skills, a new study by researchers at Yale concluded.
I’d wager that you’d find similar results if you conducted the same experiment in other fields.
First, is this actually a boy?
Second, speaking as someone who has graded exams, this is just smug Tumblr nonsense. I doubt the grader didn’t notice the second paragraph—they just viewed it as extraneous. Just like I don’t grade outlines students make in their blue books to plan out their answers (unless they don’t offer anything else).
Students of Tumblr, listen up: you’re not graded on every mark you make on the page, but whether you answer the question and how good the answer is. This student did offer a pretty decent answer. And there were other parts to the test, which we aren’t seeing.
Humorless teacher killjoy, signing out.
As many as 15 percent of freshmen at America’s top schools are white students who failed to meet their university’s minimum standards for admission, according to Peter Schmidt, deputy editor of the Chronicle of Higher Education. These kids are “people with a long-standing relationship with the university,” or in other words, the children of faculty, wealthy alumni and politicians.
According to Schmidt, these unqualified but privileged kids are nearly twice as common on top campuses as Black and Latino students who had benefited from affirmative action.
This is EXTREMELY blatant on college campuses. The fact that these things need to be clarified is sad.
Legacy is the real affirmative action…and yet we don’t see certain types of entitled people suing to dismantle that.
YUP I went to a school with so many kids like that. One dude had the nerve to go on and ON about affirmative action and how it was unfair and yet he was a legacy and his brother got into MIT because his father put in a call. Did he see any problem? Of course not.(via sunny1)
These collections are filled mostly with leftist theory, sociology, history, philosophy, political science, some econ. Sorry, STEM majors.